Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 61

Thread: AMD HD7000 Series Launch Date Revealed

  1. #1
    Registered User AFQ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    94

    AMD HD7000 Series Launch Date Revealed

    Its official, launch date of AMD’s next generation high-performance Radeon HD 7000 series GPUs is 9th January. DonanimHaber posted a picture of an invitation card to the official AMD event where two graphics cards based on 28nm Tahiti architecture will be launched. These cards are HD 7970 and HD 7950, most likely.
    Source also has a pciture of invitation card to the vent but that's not in English.

  2. #2
    Xtreme Addict Dimitriman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Rio de Janeiro
    Posts
    1,526
    We still know so little about the cards, this really is a completely different launch than that of Cayman...
    Gigabyte Z77X-UD5H
    G-Skill Ripjaws X 16Gb - 2133Mhz
    Thermalright Ultra-120 eXtreme
    i7 2600k @ 4.4Ghz
    Sapphire 7970 OC 1.2Ghz
    Mushkin Chronos Deluxe 128Gb

  3. #3
    Xtreme Mentor tbone8ty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    West hartford, CT
    Posts
    2,689
    http://www.3dcenter.org/news/2011-12-11

    3DCenter compiled specifications of "Tahiti", based on bits and pieces of information from various sources. The specs can be listed out as:

    4.50 billion transistors, die-area of 380 mm², built on TSMC 28 nm process
    Advanced GCN 1D architecture
    2048 1D processing cores
    128 TMUs, 48 ROPs
    384-bit wide GDDR5 memory interface, memory clock slightly below 1 GHz, target bandwidth of 240~264 GB/s
    grain of salt...however this is similar specs to NordicHardware article awhile back...
    FX-8350(1249PGT) @ 4.6ghz 1.44v, lapped Nzxt Havik 140 push/pull
    Asus Crosshair Formula 5 Am3+ bios v1703
    G.skill Trident X (2x4gb) ~1200mhz @ 10-12-12-31-45-1T @ 1.65v
    MSI 7950 TwinFrozr *1050/1450* Cat.14.4
    OCZ ZX 850w psu
    Lian-Li Lancool K62
    Samsung 830 128g
    2 x 1TB Samsung SpinpointF3, 2T Samsung
    Win7 Home 64bit
    My Rig

  4. #4
    Xtreme Cruncher [XC] hipno650's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    3,010
    Quote Originally Posted by Dimitriman View Post
    We still know so little about the cards, this really is a completely different launch than that of Cayman...
    the less like Cayman launch the better IMO, so much speculation and so much disappointment around that launch. I am really hoping for a CES launch though it would be nice to see if first hand.
    CPU: Intel Core i7 3930K @ 4.5GHz
    Mobo: Asus Rampage IV Extreme
    RAM: 32GB (8x4GB) Patriot Viper EX @ 1866mhz
    GPU: EVGA GTX Titan (1087Boost/6700Mem)
    Physx: Evga GTX 560 2GB
    Sound: Creative XFI Titanium
    Case: Modded 700D
    PSU: Corsair 1200AX (Fully Sleeved)
    Storage: 2x120GB OCZ Vertex 3's in RAID 0 + WD 600GB V-Raptor + Seagate 1TB
    Cooling: XSPC Raystorm, 2x MCP 655's, FrozenQ Warp Drive, EX360+MCR240+EX120 Rad's

  5. #5
    Xtreme Mentor tbone8ty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    West hartford, CT
    Posts
    2,689
    yeah definitely snuck up on us...suppose to launch Jan 9-10th. i bet it will be a nice card and age like a nice red wine after 10 driver updates
    FX-8350(1249PGT) @ 4.6ghz 1.44v, lapped Nzxt Havik 140 push/pull
    Asus Crosshair Formula 5 Am3+ bios v1703
    G.skill Trident X (2x4gb) ~1200mhz @ 10-12-12-31-45-1T @ 1.65v
    MSI 7950 TwinFrozr *1050/1450* Cat.14.4
    OCZ ZX 850w psu
    Lian-Li Lancool K62
    Samsung 830 128g
    2 x 1TB Samsung SpinpointF3, 2T Samsung
    Win7 Home 64bit
    My Rig

  6. #6
    Xtreme Mentor BababooeyHTJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,550
    Quote Originally Posted by [XC] hipno650 View Post
    the less like Cayman launch the better IMO, so much speculation and so much disappointment around that launch. I am really hoping for a CES launch though it would be nice to see if first hand.
    Why? With all seriousness, what was disappointing about the Cayman launch? They really moved the price to performance bar. 6950 launched at least $100 cheaper than 5870 with more performance, more vram, and better crossfire scaling, with solid drivers from what I saw.

  7. #7
    Xtreme Addict kuroikenshi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Australia / Europe
    Posts
    1,300
    Quote Originally Posted by BababooeyHTJ View Post
    Why? With all seriousness, what was disappointing about the Cayman launch? They really moved the price to performance bar. 6950 launched at least $100 cheaper than 5870 with more performance, more vram, and better crossfire scaling, with solid drivers from what I saw.
    yeah, 6950's launch was so crap that within a week of those cards arriving in Australia I bought two.... yeah very disappointing launch.

  8. #8
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Saskatchewan, Canada
    Posts
    2,208
    Quote Originally Posted by BababooeyHTJ View Post
    Why? With all seriousness, what was disappointing about the Cayman launch? They really moved the price to performance bar. 6950 launched at least $100 cheaper than 5870 with more performance, more vram, and better crossfire scaling, with solid drivers from what I saw.
    It not like AMD had a choice. The gtx 570 was more or less the same speed as the 6970 and already occupied the 350 price point. AMD basically priced there product according to what was competition at the time. This is what makes it a disappointing launch. It didn't force Nvidia to do particularly anything. 6870 release was much better than caymans. Cayman performance jump over cypress was among the smallest jumps ever. It also consumed much more power.
    Core i7 920@ 4.66ghz(H2O)
    6gb OCZ platinum
    4870x2 + 4890 in Trifire
    2*640 WD Blacks
    750GB Seagate.

  9. #9
    Xtreme Cruncher [XC] hipno650's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    3,010
    Quote Originally Posted by BababooeyHTJ View Post
    Why? With all seriousness, what was disappointing about the Cayman launch? They really moved the price to performance bar. 6950 launched at least $100 cheaper than 5870 with more performance, more vram, and better crossfire scaling, with solid drivers from what I saw.
    it had been hyped to the point were by a good number of people had it pegged to beat the GTX 580 and then some. instead it was a classic case of get what you pay for. cheaper card, lower launch performance compared to similarly priced competitors. the lack of increase over the 5870 was also a bummer. im not saying they are bad cards. I own a pair of them and have used countless others in systems for my customers. the 6950 unlock was also a major bonus. but overall it was not what people had hoped for.

    the 5870 launch on the other hand was excellent. considering it gave close to 40% more performance than a GTX 285 which was the fastest single GPU of the time it was HUGE step forward. know I know full well that Cayman could have never been that type of gain because it was stuck on 40nm but all i am trying to say is that most people expected it to be more than it turned out to be.

    With the 7900 series there is almost no hype and it has really come out of no ware thus i think most people will be very surprised with the numbers considering there is no chance to hype the card up...
    CPU: Intel Core i7 3930K @ 4.5GHz
    Mobo: Asus Rampage IV Extreme
    RAM: 32GB (8x4GB) Patriot Viper EX @ 1866mhz
    GPU: EVGA GTX Titan (1087Boost/6700Mem)
    Physx: Evga GTX 560 2GB
    Sound: Creative XFI Titanium
    Case: Modded 700D
    PSU: Corsair 1200AX (Fully Sleeved)
    Storage: 2x120GB OCZ Vertex 3's in RAID 0 + WD 600GB V-Raptor + Seagate 1TB
    Cooling: XSPC Raystorm, 2x MCP 655's, FrozenQ Warp Drive, EX360+MCR240+EX120 Rad's

  10. #10
    Xtreme Mentor tbone8ty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    West hartford, CT
    Posts
    2,689
    cayman underperformed because it was stuck at 40nm. period end of story.
    FX-8350(1249PGT) @ 4.6ghz 1.44v, lapped Nzxt Havik 140 push/pull
    Asus Crosshair Formula 5 Am3+ bios v1703
    G.skill Trident X (2x4gb) ~1200mhz @ 10-12-12-31-45-1T @ 1.65v
    MSI 7950 TwinFrozr *1050/1450* Cat.14.4
    OCZ ZX 850w psu
    Lian-Li Lancool K62
    Samsung 830 128g
    2 x 1TB Samsung SpinpointF3, 2T Samsung
    Win7 Home 64bit
    My Rig

  11. #11
    Xtremely Hot Sauce Bobsama's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    3,586
    Quote Originally Posted by tbone8ty View Post
    cayman underperformed because it was stuck at 40nm. period end of story.
    Manufacturing method doesn't really have that much to do with performance. It's far more closely associated with manufacturing cost and with power draw. That said, there are power draw ceilings. Cayman increased the die size by 25% and launched at the same price. The reason I think it was a flop was because of the price--it's always been pretty expensive compared to the HD 5850's (which have only been cleared out for a few months now). AMD didn't really up the ante by replacing Cypress with Cayman. Keeping Juniper on didn't really help, either. In tech, every product has to be good. If not, you're bleeding--customer loyalty if nothing else.

    My toys:
    Asus Sabertooth X58 | Core i7-950 (D0) | CM Hyper 212+ | G.Skill Sniper LV 12GB DDR3-1600 CL9 | GeForce GTX 670-2048MB | OCZ Agility 4 512GB, WD Raptor 150GB x 3 (RAID0), WD Black 1TB x 2 (RAID0) | XFX 650W CAH9 | Lian-Li PC-9F | Win 7 Pro x86-64
    Gigabyte EX58-UD3R | Core i7-920 (D0) | Stock HSF | G.Skill Sniper LV 4GB DDR3-1600 CL9 | Radeon HD 2600 Pro 512MB | WD Caviar 80GB IDE, 4TB x 2 (RAID5) | Corsair TX750 | XClio 188AF | Win 7 Pro x86-64
    Dell Dimension 8400 | Pentium 4 530 HT (E0) | Stock HSF | 1.5GB DDR2-400 CL3 | GeForce 8800 GT 256MB | WD Caviar 160GB SATA | Stock PSU | (Broken) Stock Case | Win Vista HP x86
    Little Dot DAC_I | Little Dot MK IV | Beyerdynamic DT-880 Premium (600 Ω) | TEAC AG-H300 MkIII | Polk Audio Monitor 5 Series 2's

  12. #12
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,657
    Quote Originally Posted by tbone8ty View Post
    cayman underperformed because it was stuck at 40nm. period end of story.
    How often is that not the case, the same can be said for just about any silicon part really.

    What silicon product wouldn't perform better at a smaller node.

    EDIT: Not that dumb shrink would unlock any special potential but the benefits of being able to pack more transistors on a die and better power efficiency could help overall performance.
    Last edited by highoctane; 12-12-2011 at 08:23 PM.
    Work Rig: Asus x58 P6T Deluxe, i7 950 24x166 1.275v, BIX2/GTZ/D5
    3x2048 GSkill pi Black DDR3 1600, Quadro 600
    PCPower & Cooling Silencer 750, CM Stacker 810

    Game Rig: Asus x58 P6T, i7 970 24x160 1.2v HT on, TRUE120
    3x4096 GSkill DDR3 1600, PNY 660ti
    PCPower & Cooling Silencer 750, CM Stacker 830

    AMD Rig: Biostar TA790GX A2+, x4 940 16x200, stock hsf
    2x2gb Patriot DDR2 800, PowerColor 4850
    Corsair VX450

  13. #13
    Xtreme Mentor tbone8ty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    West hartford, CT
    Posts
    2,689
    they designed caymen to beat 580 expecting to use it on the smaller process...if Caymen was released on 28nm or 32nm whatever it was suppose to be..it would have had 1920 SP. hence that is why they had to delay NI and re-arrange their road map. the HD 7000 series is kinda what was suppose to be caymen.
    FX-8350(1249PGT) @ 4.6ghz 1.44v, lapped Nzxt Havik 140 push/pull
    Asus Crosshair Formula 5 Am3+ bios v1703
    G.skill Trident X (2x4gb) ~1200mhz @ 10-12-12-31-45-1T @ 1.65v
    MSI 7950 TwinFrozr *1050/1450* Cat.14.4
    OCZ ZX 850w psu
    Lian-Li Lancool K62
    Samsung 830 128g
    2 x 1TB Samsung SpinpointF3, 2T Samsung
    Win7 Home 64bit
    My Rig

  14. #14
    Xtreme Addict Lanek's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    1,926
    Quote Originally Posted by [XC] hipno650 View Post
    the less like Cayman launch the better IMO, so much speculation and so much disappointment around that launch. I am really hoping for a CES launch though it would be nice to see if first hand.
    I was respond the exact same thing to Dimitrian ... I better like know less or nothing instead of get 1000 pages of speculation and fake bench ( remember we have the big line of what is GCN , and a little idea of what the spec can be. ( 30-32CU, 4SMID/CU, 16Vector Alu + 1Scalar Unit/SMID ( ofc i will not cite all the parts ).

    In reality, this launch remember me more the HD5800 launch....

    Quote Originally Posted by tbone8ty View Post
    they designed caymen to beat 580 expecting to use it on the smaller process...if Caymen was released on 28nm or 32nm whatever it was suppose to be..it would have had 1920 SP. hence that is why they had to delay NI and re-arrange their road map. the HD 7000 series is kinda what was suppose to be caymen.
    Cayman in 32nm, was designed far before the GTX480-580 was even released.... make an architecture ( dont misunderstand i dont say mArch )dont take 8-12month normally ( it's 2-3 years mostly ), specially if the core was designed for a lower process (32nm).

    But who know.. Maybe Northern Island was allready designed for be GCN in 32nm and then Southern in 28nm.. ( lower process + new arch in 32nm ), I remember we was waiting a new architecture, and VLIW4 is not so different of VLIW5 (terrascale ).
    Last edited by Lanek; 12-13-2011 at 01:51 AM.
    CPU: - I7 4930K (EK Supremacy )
    GPU: - 2x AMD HD7970 flashed GHZ bios ( EK Acetal Nickel Waterblock H2o)
    Motherboard: Asus x79 Deluxe
    RAM: G-skill Ares C9 2133mhz 16GB
    Main Storage: Samsung 840EVO 500GB / 2x Crucial RealSSD C300 Raid0

  15. #15
    Xtreme Member mR Yellow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    404
    Can't wait for this bad boy. Guess i'll need to scratch the itch.
    INTEL 2600K @ 4.5ghz 24/7 Corsair H100
    ASUS P8Z68-V PRO
    2 x CORSAIR 4GB DDR3 1600 (CL8)
    4TB Seagate SATA2
    SAPPHIRE 7950 (GPU 1100 | MEM 1500)
    Cosmos S
    Asus XONAR DX
    Corsair 850W PSU

  16. #16
    Xtreme Addict Lanek's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    1,926
    Quote Originally Posted by Bobsama View Post
    Manufacturing method doesn't really have that much to do with performance. It's far more closely associated with manufacturing cost and with power draw. That said, there are power draw ceilings. Cayman increased the die size by 25% and launched at the same price. The reason I think it was a flop was because of the price--it's always been pretty expensive compared to the HD 5850's (which have only been cleared out for a few months now). AMD didn't really up the ante by replacing Cypress with Cayman. Keeping Juniper on didn't really help, either. In tech, every product has to be good. If not, you're bleeding--customer loyalty if nothing else.
    For performance, not in itself, but on how is designed the cores within the process make a big difference.... with a die shrink (40>32nm), only 400SP more will have make a nice difference, enough for be side by side with the GTX580 ... without saying the GCE ( Tesselation units etc ) will have maybe completely different. ( it's the part similar of Cypress, the GCE is just doubled ).
    Last edited by Lanek; 12-13-2011 at 02:31 AM.
    CPU: - I7 4930K (EK Supremacy )
    GPU: - 2x AMD HD7970 flashed GHZ bios ( EK Acetal Nickel Waterblock H2o)
    Motherboard: Asus x79 Deluxe
    RAM: G-skill Ares C9 2133mhz 16GB
    Main Storage: Samsung 840EVO 500GB / 2x Crucial RealSSD C300 Raid0

  17. #17
    Xtreme Addict Andrea deluxe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Italia
    Posts
    1,018
    the only problem for real gamer are....

    ati driver lock framerate to 60 in dx10/11 games when connected to a 120hz monitor and v-sync enabled.


    nvidia driver are able (with the option "force max refresh") to force 120fps in a 120hz monitor in most of the dx10/11 games with v-sync on.

    real gamer have 120 monitor.... and real gamer can't accept that limit....

  18. #18
    Xtreme Addict Oliverda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Hungary (EU)
    Posts
    1,376
    Quote Originally Posted by andrea deluxe View Post
    the only problem for real gamer are....

    Ati driver lock framerate to 60 in dx10/11 games when connected to a 120hz monitor and v-sync enabled.


    Nvidia driver are able (with the option "force max refresh") to force 120fps in a 120hz monitor in most of the dx10/11 games with v-sync on.

    Real gamer have 120 monitor.... And real gamer can't accept that limit....

    -

  19. #19
    Xtreme Addict Andrea deluxe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Italia
    Posts
    1,018
    Quote Originally Posted by Oliverda View Post
    for me is a problem.....

    maybe for you no.....


    different people different needs

    funny to see emoticon without words to explain why!

  20. #20
    Xtreme Addict Lanek's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    1,926
    i dont see any reason to lock to 60hz/60fps on 120hz monitor ... or are we speaking with 3D enabled ?

    Cause it seem you mean, the AMD driver understand 120hz , as 60hz .....
    Last edited by Lanek; 12-13-2011 at 03:53 AM.
    CPU: - I7 4930K (EK Supremacy )
    GPU: - 2x AMD HD7970 flashed GHZ bios ( EK Acetal Nickel Waterblock H2o)
    Motherboard: Asus x79 Deluxe
    RAM: G-skill Ares C9 2133mhz 16GB
    Main Storage: Samsung 840EVO 500GB / 2x Crucial RealSSD C300 Raid0

  21. #21
    Xtreme Addict Andrea deluxe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Italia
    Posts
    1,018
    Quote Originally Posted by Lanek View Post
    If im right this have been corrected allready .... Anyway i dont see any reason to lock to 60hz/60fps on 120fps ... or are we speaking with 3D enabled ?
    no.

    im talking about 2D 120hz.

    one example?

    dirt3 dx11

    hd6990 + 120hz monitor = 120Hz but 60Fps v-sync on

    gtx590 + 120Hz monitor = 120Hz and 120Fps v-sync on




    IMHO is important..... no?

  22. #22
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    104
    I also expected more from 6950 , the unlock was a grt feature , but I ended up getting 2 x 5870's all for $550 , so not a bad deal (beggining of this year)
    I did want the 2 x 6950's but the friend who brought them for me (from the u.k) didnt want to spend the extra cash .... in all my 5870's preform very well ...
    bar driver issues with 22inch samsung + tearing (even in windows) , I had to hunt around to get better drivers to minimize the tearing .....
    tempting though the new cards will be come 2012 ! if the're priced right +/- <$400 , :-)

  23. #23
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    104
    sig update
    1st pc i72600k /Asus P8P67 -M Pro / 2 x 4gig HyperX /Ati XfX 5870 / CorsairTX950 / 1 x seagate 2tb / 2 x samsung 2tb
    2nd pc i52400 (was supposed to be 2100) /Asus P8H61-MLX / 1 x 4gig hynix /Ati XfX 5870 / CorsairTX850 / 1 x samsung 1tb
    3rd pc Core2Duo E4500 /Foxconn / 2 x 1gig ddr2 hynix /Ati Asus 5770 / Generic Gold 500w / 1 x samsung 1tb

  24. #24
    Xtreme Addict Lanek's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    1,926
    Quote Originally Posted by Andrea deluxe View Post
    no.

    im talking about 2D 120hz.

    one example?

    dirt3 dx11

    hd6990 + 120hz monitor = 120Hz but 60Fps v-sync on

    gtx590 + 120Hz monitor = 120Hz and 120Fps v-sync on




    IMHO is important..... no?
    Yes.. for me it will ( just cause most games will run at 120+fps (huum i say most, i dont speak about metro etc ))... but i think this is a bug with some 120hz monitor, now i remember have read something about this on the release note of a driver. surely fixed since.

    Serously i see a lot of peoples with 120hz monitor and AMD 6K, and they dont have this lock it seems.
    Last edited by Lanek; 12-13-2011 at 04:50 AM.
    CPU: - I7 4930K (EK Supremacy )
    GPU: - 2x AMD HD7970 flashed GHZ bios ( EK Acetal Nickel Waterblock H2o)
    Motherboard: Asus x79 Deluxe
    RAM: G-skill Ares C9 2133mhz 16GB
    Main Storage: Samsung 840EVO 500GB / 2x Crucial RealSSD C300 Raid0

  25. #25
    Xtreme Member kam03's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    141
    Quote Originally Posted by Andrea deluxe View Post
    the only problem for real gamer are....

    ati driver lock framerate to 60 in dx10/11 games when connected to a 120hz monitor and v-sync enabled.


    nvidia driver are able (with the option "force max refresh") to force 120fps in a 120hz monitor in most of the dx10/11 games with v-sync on.

    real gamer have 120 monitor.... and real gamer can't accept that limit....
    LOL @ real gamer.
    Intel i7 3770K @ 4.5ghz
    Asus P8Z77-V
    8GB Crucial 1866Mhz CL9
    AMD Sapphire Radeon HD 6970
    Crucial RealSSD M4 128GB
    2x WD Raptor X
    Enermax Galaxy 1000W DXX
    NEC LCD2690WUXi
    Yamaha RX-V667 Receiver
    Monitor Audio Vector 5.1

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •